 BetterPhoto Member |
Info on Macro Lenses I am interested in macro photography - flowers, insects, etc. - and am curious as to the most efficient lens to purchase. I have been told to get the 50mm and others have said to go for the 100mm. I would like to have the lens that can do the most with other possible uses but I don't know the advantages/disadvantages of each. I am new to the field and only know what I would like to accomplish. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Matt M. L'Etoile |
You should get a telephoto lens. I have a 70-210mm lens with macro capability, and it works great when using the macro feature.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Bob Cammarata |
Check the life-size reproduction of any macro lens you are considering. They should say "1:1" (which is true life-size), or at least "1:2" (1/2 life-size). Anything else would be considered a "close-focusing lens" and would have limitations ... not only in your ability to get in real close, but in sharpness and clarity as well. A true macro prime lens produces better corner-to-corner sharpness due to specialized glass designed specifically for close-up work. They are also better for use in low light than a zoom would be. As far as lens focal length, that would depend upon your intended subject matter. Macros in the 105mm range and larger will allow you to shoot farther away from skittish insects, but would have less depth of field than a lens in the 50-60 mm range.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Floribunda |
Hi John. I've been shooting a lot of flowers in the last six months. I'm on the Nikon platform and have both the 60mm and the 105mm but use the 105mm more often with the Canon 500D diopter and an 81A filter. Extenders are good too and the 1.4x teleconverter. I also use an 80-200mm or an 80-400mm lens for subjects that interest me but are too far away to use the macro lens. I also pack a 12" collapsible diffuser by Westcott and the small reversible reflectors by Photoflex. And don't forget the bug spray!
|
|
|
|
||
|
Michael McCullough |
Try extension tubes. These are a really great and inexpensive way to get up close and personal to your subject without the cost of a macro lenses. And the image quality remains the same as the lens you're using!!
|
|
|
|
||
|
Ken Henry |
I've used extension tubes on my 90TSE Canon. I just purchased the new upgrade, Sigma 70-300 APO Macro Super II, 1:2 macro ratio, and also the Canon 500D close-up lens, which takes it down to less than 1:1. Now I'll buy the Canon 250D, which will go even smaller. This lens has been highly rated by PopPhoto to meet pro standards. It really is sharp, corner to corner - plus the versatility of a zoom for anything including fine portraits. I'm glad I purchased this instead of a 100mm macro lens.
|
|
|
|
||
|
doug Nelson |
If money is an issue, consider a manual-focus macro lens. At the prices they go for, you could afford both a 50mm and a 90 or 100. They can be had for about $150 each. I have used the 50mm f3.5 Canon FD macro and the 90mm Vivitar Series 1; both are superb. All the major manufacturers made excellent macro lenses. Get the best deal you can on the lenses, and buy a manual-focus body to fit, between $75 and $150. As Michael says, try 25mm of extension on your 50mm and see if that meets your needs.
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||